DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Marijuana and DUI laws

I wanted to get y'alls thoughts and opinions on this subject.


Article from the Cleveland Plain dealer this morning.

www.cleveland.com/news/2024/10/poli...rive-critics-call-it-utter-nonsense.html

That process is ripe for abuse, and there will be ambulance chasing lawyer types hounding every person that this testing is used on. That said, I think there is a real need for a method to determine if someone is impaired from marijuana use. A while back, I ate a gummy at a party and there's no way in hell I could/should have been behind the wheel (I didn't drive). It was a pretty intense high that really affected my mental acuity and motor skills. I think just video taping the sobriety tests they use now will have to do.

I understood there is no good way to roadside sobriety for pot yet.

You should get someone to give this thread a better title.

Cops are already doing this, and it's assinine. I am all for a test that shows how impaired you are BUT no test exists yet. This can be a huge problem for me and others like me. I carry a vape pen with me everyplace I go. Some smuck sees the vape pen and assumes I am high and BAM DUI even though I don't use it while driving.

I don't even get high anymore. I use 25 MG of THC just to be able to sleep at night. The only way I know it's even in my system is 99 percent of my pain goes away. I can also tell very clearly when it wears off. But if I hit my vape pen 15 times in a row you wouldn't even notice a difference.

Is there are breath test for marijuana DUIs?

While breath tests have been invented for marijuana DUIs, none of them has proven to be reliable.

These breath tests aim to detect delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on your breath. They are supposed to work like breath tests for alcohol, measuring blood alcohol content (BAC). However, no marijuana breath test has produced reliable results.[1]

Does THC show up on a blood test?

Police often turn to blood tests to detect marijuana impairment. These test your blood for THC.

After you ingest marijuana, THC, the active ingredient in the drug, attaches to your body’s fat cells. Those THC metabolites are gradually eliminated through the normal digestion process.

Blood tests can detect how much THC is in your bloodstream by measuring these metabolites.

Unfortunately, those metabolites are not eliminated at the same rate. Different people have different elimination rates. Some factors include:

how often you partake in marijuana use,
how much you ingested the last time you used it,
how you ingested it,
your genetic makeup, and
your metabolism.

As a result, THC can still be detected in your blood up to 12 hours after you have ingested it.[2] This can be longer than you would be too impaired by the drug to drive. This can lead to false positives, where you are sober but you fail the blood test.

Because these tests require a blood draw, they cannot be conducted during the traffic stop. Police will generally have to detain you and bring you to a hospital or the police station for the blood draw. To make a DUI arrest, they must have probable cause to believe you are too impaired to drive a motor vehicle. Additionally, police may need a warrant to require you to submit to a blood test.[3]

What other chemical tests can police use?

Police can use 2 other types of test to detect THC in your body:

urine tests, and/or
saliva tests.

Both of these tests have some of the same drawbacks as a blood test.

Urine tests can detect THC in a person’s system up to 30 days after you ingested it.[4] Additionally, they generally cannot be conducted during the traffic stop.

Saliva tests can be done during the traffic stop with a simple swab. However, they can detect THC in your saliva up to 24 hours after you ingested it.

The long detection windows of both of these test results can lead to false positives.


Will field sobriety tests show marijuana impairment?

Law enforcement officers often use FSTs to detect cannabis impairment. However, studies have shown that they are very unreliable.

Most FSTs are designed to test your:

memory,
muscle movement,
coordination, and

A couple of common FSTs that police use when they suspect that you are under the influence of marijuana are the:

horizontal gaze nystagmus test, and
one-leg stand.

However, these and other FSTs are poor indicators of marijuana impairment.[5] One study involved 184 participants who were either given THC or a placebo. Police officers then conducted FSTs on them. The officers claimed that:

only 81 percent of the participants who were given THC were, in fact impaired, while
over 49 percent of the sober participants were impaired.[6]


What about the officer’s testimony?

The arresting officer’s testimony plays a big part in DUI cases involving marijuana. Officers generally report that they:

smelled the presence of marijuana,
saw marijuana or other paraphernalia in the vehicle,
thought that you were distracted during the stop,
noticed that your pupils were dilated, and/or
thought that they saw other signs of impairment.

Some police officers have special training in detecting signs of drug impairment. Known as drug recognition experts, or DREs, many have taken a course on drug detection. The requirements for DRE certification vary by state.

Is there a legal limit for marijuana DUI cases?

Since the legalization movement, a couple of states have passed laws that set a legal limit for marijuana impairment while driving. For example, in Montana, you are per se under the influence of marijuana, or presumed to be too impaired to drive, if a test shows that you have 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.[7]

This is similar to the per se legal limit of 0.08 percent for BAC in cases involving the influence of alcohol.

However, there is no scientific consensus that this level of THC makes you impaired.[8]


If the government would just get off their fat lazy behinds and drop pot from a schedule 1 drug to a schedule 4 drug the stuidies would go so much faster. Being listed as a schedule 1 drug. (Come on now nobody in there right mind thinks pot is as dangerous as : heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD),), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote. or as bad as schedule 2 drugs Vicodin), cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritali. Hell,other schedule IV drugs like Xanax, Soma, Darvon, Darvocet, Valium, Ativan, Talwin, Ambien, Tramadol are worse for you than pot.

It's just more BS they made up. I know it certainly works in the other direction in terms of DUI's with alcohol. Even if you pass the field sobriety test for a DUI they can ignore that and require you to take a breathalyzer test. I don't see how that isn't a form of double jeopardy. If the field sobriety test only works in their favor and if you pass it, it doesn't count, why give it to you in the first lace?

Oh, I believe you. They just need to determine and settle on what constitutes the minimal physical and mental skills needed to safely operate a motor vehicle (something better than the archaic FST's they use now, and less ridiculous than the tests mentioned in the article). If someone passes the test, they're not impaired and should be free to go. If they fail with video proof, then a tox screen should be done. Those tests and the use of a drug recognition expert as mentioned in the article are a total waste of time.

This practice should be outlawed. It is entirely subjective in nature and easy to abuse.

The fact that there aren't any good alternatives has no bearing on the fact that this is complete garbage and should be inadmissible. Like, how any half-decent lawyer doesn't get any DRE testimony thrown out simply on the basis that their conclusions could be the result of anything at all is beyond me.

This, like civil forfeiture, is a complete crock and - I believe - an infringement of a Right to due process (this creates conditions for a wholly unfair trial as the prosecution is able to manufacture evidence based on an opinion).

I’ve always wondered how easy or hard it is to get a dui. It seems like cops don’t want to give them out because a) it’s ruining someone’s life, b) the legal issues/court appearances for cops that ensue.

One of my buddies, about 8 years ago had a few too many at his girlfriend’s work Christmas party. - He was stupid enough to take a couple shots as well before leaving. They hop in his car, minutes later he doesn’t come to a complete stop at an intersection… the sirens come at him and you can imagine the butterflies in his stomach. He was nailed and he knew it. As the cop approaches, his girlfriend (passed out) rolls over and tells him that she’s pregnant. - Stroke of luck I suppose. The cop asks him to step out of the car, asks him how much he’d had to drink and he responds like a deer in headlights “Sir my girlfriend just told me she’s pregnant and I’m in shock right now.” Cop asks him if he’s ok to drive home and eventually let him go. - That’s one of many similar stories that I could share.

I’ve never driven drunk but have always wondered how many “morning after” dui’s occur. I imagine that people who drink all night still have enough booze in their system to pop for a dui, but I’ve never heard of anyone getting a dui on their morning drive to work/home.